Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Hip resurfacing in patients under thirty years old: an attractive option for young and active patients

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing is offered as an alternative to traditional hip arthroplasty for young, active adults with advanced osteoarthritis. The concept of hip resurfacing is considered very attractive for this specific population (hard-on-hard bearing component with a large femoral head limiting the risk of dislocation, and allowing femoral bone stock preservation).

Methods

A prospective clinical trial was designed to investigate the outcome of hip resurfacing in young patients (under 30 years old). We studied 24 hips in 22 patients. Mean age at operation was 24.9 years (range 17.1–29.9). No patient was lost to follow-up.

Results

There was no revision at average follow-up of 50.6 months (44–59). Mean UCLA activity score improved from 5.5 (1–9) pre-operatively to 7.6 (1–10) postoperatively (p < 0.001). Mean Harris hip score increased from 43.9 (19–67) to 89.3 (55–100) (p < 0.001). Radiological analysis discerned no osteolysis and no implant migration.

Conclusion

The absence of short-term complications, such as mechanical failure or dislocation, is encouraging and leads us to think that mid-term results will be satisfactory. Moreover, the specific advantages of hip resurfacing (bone stock preservation, excellent stability, low risk of dislocation, large-diameter head) make the procedure a very attractive option for young subjects.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Amstutz HC, Antoniades JT, Le Duff MJ (2007) Results of metal-on-metal hybrid hip resurfacing for Crowe type-I and II developmental dysplasia. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89(2):339–346

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Berry DJ, Harmsen WS, Cabanela ME, Morrey BF (2002) Twenty-five-year survivorship of two thousand consecutive primary Charnley total hip replacements: factors affecting survivorship of acetabular and femoral components. J Bone Joint Surg Am 84(A2):171–177

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Bonnomet F, Glorion C (2008) Total hip arthroplasty in patients younger than 30 years old: conclusions and recommendations. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 94(suppl 6):S192–196

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Callaghan JJ, Templeton JE, Liu SS, Warth LC, Chung YY (2006) Improved results using extensively coated THA stems at minimum 5-year followup. Clin Orthop Relat Res 453:91–96

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Caton J, Prudhon JL (2011) Over 25 years survival after Charnley 's total hip arthroplasty. Inter Orthop 35(2):185–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Chmell MJ, Scott RD, Thomas WH, Sledge CB (1997) Total hip arthroplasty with cement for juvenile rheumatoid arthritis. Results at a minimum of ten years in patients less than thirty years old. J Bone Joint Surg Am 79(1):44–52

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Courpied JP, Caton J (2011) Total hip arthroplasty state of the art for the 21th century. Inter Orthop 35(2):149–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Crowe JF, Mani VJ, Ranawat CS (1979) Total hip replacement in congenital dislocation and dysplasia of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Am 61(1):15–23

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. De Steiger RN, Hang JR, Miller LN, Graves SE, Davidson DC (2011) Five-year results of the ASR XL Acetabular System and the ASR Hip Resurfacing System: an analysis from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. J Bone Joint Surg Am 93(24):2287–2293

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Dorr LD, Kane TJ 3rd, Conaty JP (1994) Long-term results of cemented total hip arthroplasty in patients 45 years old or younger. A 16-year follow-up study. J Arthroplasty 9(5):453–456

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Dorr LD, Luckett M, Conaty JP (1990) Total hip arthroplasties in patients younger than 45 years. A nine- to ten-year follow-up study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 260:215–219

    Google Scholar 

  12. Dudkiewicz I, Salai M, Ganel A, Blankstein A, Chechik A (2002) Total hip arthroplasty in patients younger than 30 years of age following developmental dysplasia of hip (DDH) in infancy. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 122(3):139–142

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Dudkiewicz I, Salai M, Israeli A, Amit Y, Chechick A (2003) Total hip arthroplasty in patients younger than 30 years of age. Isr Med Assoc J 5(10):709–712

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Falez F, Favetti F, Casella F, Papalia M, Panegrossi G (2011) Results of hip resurfacing. Inter Orthop 35:239–243

    Google Scholar 

  15. Fouilleron N, Wavreille G, Endjah N, Girard J (2012) Running activity after hip resurfacing arthroplasty: a prospective study. Am J Sports Med 40(4):889–894

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Girard J, Lavigne M, Vendittoli PA, Roy AG (2006) Biomechanical reconstruction of the hip: a randomised study comparing total hip resurfacing and total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 88(6):721–726

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Halley DK, Wroblewski BM (1986) Long-term results of low-friction arthroplasty in patients 30 years of age or younger. Clin Orthop Relat Res 211:43–50

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hannouche D, Zaoui A, Zadegan F, Laurent S, Nizard R (2011) Thirty years of experience with alumina-on-alumina bearings in total hip arthroplasty. Inter Orthop 35(2):207–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Kinkel S, Kaefer W, Reissig W, Puhl W, Kessler S (2003) Revision total hip arthroplasty: the influence of gender and age on the perioperative complication rate. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech 70(5):269–273

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Komistek RD, Dennis DA, Ochoa JA, Haas BD, Hammill C (2002) In vivo comparison of hip separation after metal-on-metal or metal-on-polyethylene total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 84(A10):1836–1841

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Lavigne M, Masse V, Girard J, Roy AG, Vendittoli PA (2008) Return to sport after hip resurfacing or total hip arthroplasty: a randomized study. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 94(4):361–367

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Luetzner J, Krummenauer F, Lengel AM, Ziegler J, Witzleb WC (2007) Serum metal ion exposure after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 461:136–142

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Massin P, Schmidt L, Engh CA (1989) Evaluation of cementless acetabular component migration. An experimental study. J Arthroplasty 4(3):245–251

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. McBryde CW, Shears E, O'Hara JN, Pynsent PB (2008) Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing in developmental dysplasia: a case–control study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 90(6):708–714

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Migaud H, Jobin A, Chantelot C, Giraud F, Laffargue P, Duquennoy A (2004) Cementless metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty in patients less than 50 years of age: comparison with a matched control group using ceramic-on-polyethylene after a minimum 5-year follow-up. J Arthroplasty 19(8 Suppl 3):23–28

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Naam P, Desouza RM, Wallace D, Costa ML, Krikler SJ (2012) Transplacental passage of metal ions in women with hip resurfacing: no teratogenic effects observed. Hip Int 22(1):96–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Nizard R, Pourreyron D, Raould A, Hannouche D, Sedel L (2008) Alumina-on-alumina hip arthroplasty in patients younger than 30 years old. Clin Orthop Relat Res 466(2):317–323

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Odent T, Journeau P, Prieur AM, Touzet P, Pouliquen JC, Glorion C (2005) Cementless hip arthroplasty in juvenile idiopathic arthritis. J Pediatr Orthop 25(4):465–470

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Pandit H, Glyn-Jones S, McLardy-Smith P et al (2008) Pseudotumours associated with metal-on-metal hip resurfacings. J Bone Joint Surg Br 90(7):847–851

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Ruddlesdin C, Ansell BM, Arden GP, Swann M (1986) Total hip replacement in children with juvenile chronic arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 68(2):218–222

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Sochart DH, Porter ML (1998) Long-term results of cemented Charnley low-friction arthroplasty in patients aged less than 30 years. J Arthroplasty 13(2):123–131

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Stover MD, Beaule PE, Matta JM, Mast JW (2004) Hip arthrodesis: a procedure for the new millennium? Clin Orthop Relat Res(418):126–133

  33. Tharani R, Dorey FJ, Schmalzried TP (2001) The risk of cancer following total hip or knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 83(A5):774–780

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Torchia ME, Klassen RA, Bianco AJ (1996) Total hip arthroplasty with cement in patients less than twenty years old. Long-term results. J Bone Joint Surg Am 78(7):995–1003

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Triclot P (2010) Metal-on-metal: history, state of the art. Inter Orthop 35(6):201–206

    Google Scholar 

  36. Vendittoli PA, Lavigne M, Girard J, Roy AG (2006) A randomised study comparing resection of acetabular bone at resurfacing and total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 88(8):997–1002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Visuri T, Pukkala E, Paavolainen P, Pulkkinen P, Riska EB (1996) Cancer risk after metal on metal and polyethylene on metal total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 329(Suppl):S280–289

    Google Scholar 

  38. Witt JD, Swann M, Ansell BM (1991) Total hip replacement for juvenile chronic arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 73(5):770–773

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Roger Salengro Hospital, 2 avenue Oscar Lambret, Lille, 59037, France

    Nicolas Krantz, Bruno Miletic, Henri Migaud & Julien Girard

  2. Department of Sports Medicine, University of Lille 2, 59045, Lille Cedex, France

    Julien Girard

  3. Orthopaedic and Sports Medicine Department, Lille University Hospital, 2 avenue Oscar Lambret, 59037, Lille Cedex, France

    Julien Girard

Authors
  1. Nicolas Krantz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bruno Miletic
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Henri Migaud
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Julien Girard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Julien Girard.

Additional information

Investigations performed at Lille University, Department of Sports Medicine, Lille Cedex, France.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Krantz, N., Miletic, B., Migaud, H. et al. Hip resurfacing in patients under thirty years old: an attractive option for young and active patients. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 36, 1789–1794 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-012-1555-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-012-1555-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation